Thursday, February 28, 2013

Collection-Level Finding Aids

1) Civilian Conservation Corps in Massachusetts Photograph Collection, ca. 1930-1939


This screenshot from UMass's Special Collections and University Archives is a good example of a typical online finding aid. The actual web page has a lot more information on it than the screenshot. In any case, this collection-level finding aid is set up like a printed finding aid--title, extent, historical note, scope and content, restriction on access, box inventory, subject headings, call number and more. I used this example because while it is a good finding aid, there are no linked images. So, this might be useful for pre-research, but it is not helpful for a user who wants to research solely on the web. It is simply an online version of an existing finding aid.

2) Frank M. Hohenberger Photograph Collection


Once again, this screenshot does not do this collection-level finding aid any justice. This example is from the Lilly Library at Indiana University (my alma mater). The Frank M. Hohenberger Photograph collection is entirely digitized, which makes it very appealing for researchers. As you can see below, this is not a typical finding aid (such as the UMass one)--instead, this collection is meant to be used online. 

In my opinion, I think that there is an important distinction between online representations of physical finding aids, which require users to go to the physical library to see the photographs, and searchable online databases that give immediate access to the photos. In my experience, I find it much easier to browse photos from the web and then select the ones I want to see in person. However, I understand the difficulty in digitizing entire collections for online use. 

My thoughts mostly revolve around the usefulness of an online finding aid for a photograph collection that has no linked/embedded images (such as the UMass example). Is it necessary to have a finding aid online just for the sake of having it online? I'm not sure. To be truly useful, I think that an online finding aid for a photograph collection should be designed for the web, with linked digital images and web 2.0 components. Once again, though, a lack of resources make creating such a system very challenging.  In any case, it's just something I've been thinking about during this unit.

-Meg Campbell 

Photographic Collection's Finding Aids

 
http://www.lib.unc.edu/ncc/pcoll/inv/P0020/P0020.html
The Elmer D. Johnson Photographic collection from the University of
North Carolina is a good example of an enriched collection level
description. The abstract gives a complete description, giving the
researcher a good idea of what the collection entails without looking
at the item level descriptions. The item level descriptions are also
complete. They identify the views with names of buildings and
locations instead of just stating "interior view" or "exterior view". If
that information is available it is important to include it.
 
http://library.duke.edu/digitalcollections/gedney/
The William Gedney Photographs and Writings Collection from Duke
University is also a good example of a comprehensive collection level
description. It gives an idea of the time frame, places, and subjects
of the photographs without going into a item level description. This
collection is also a good example of how computers have made
intellectually arranging collections more flexible. The Subject,
Genre, Date, and Title tabs allow for researchers to search the
collection is a number of ways and relieves the archivist of having to
choose only one way to arrange them.
 

PHOTOGRAVURE




Photogravure: An Intaglio Photomechanical Printing Process.


Photogravure prints were used in book illustration from 1880 into the 20th c. Karl Klic in Vienna patented the photogravure process in 1879.  Intaglio is defined as “an engraving or incised figure in stone or other hard material depressed below the surface so that an impression from the design yields and image in relief.” Artists invented intaglio printmaking in the Italian Renaissance and all of the major photographic processes that followed, including the work of Niepce, Daguerre, Talbot and Archer were based on “the art of engraving”.

                                   
Since photogravure is ink on paper process, it was possible to incorporate color or toning. A metal plate is sensitized with bichromated gelatin and then exposed and washed. Then the plate is etched in acid and cleaned before being inked and printed in the engraving press.  Klic is credited with improving and refining the process using polished copper plates, fine grain resins and carbon tissue with photographic imagery.

Later in the 19th century the printing plate of the intaglio press was replaced by a copper cylinder and that allowed for more rapid production of prints. Edward Curtis made use of photogravure technology to publish his encyclopedia, The North American Indian. He produced over 2,200 photogravures for publication although he worked in a variety of techniques mainly silver gelatin and platinum and palladium prints.


Pictorialist photographers, most notably Alfred Steiglitz, Alvin Langdon Coburn and Paul Strand valued the photogravure process for its “supple and rich” qualities to express their view that photography should be equated with art. Steiglitz published Camera Notes and Camera Work using photogravure and many artists considered photogravure prints to be originals because they were made from positives from the original negatives and their production was directly supervised.
         In 1970 when Time-Life published the “Life Library of Photography: The Print” the editors feature Stieglitz’s Camera Work in the introduction. And it was stated that in 1970, the photogravure was still the “finest of all processes for reproducing black and white (and other single-color photographs). They explain that the photogravure “actually forms an image on paper in much the same way that darkroom chemicals do. Just as the darkroom process deposits chemicals in varying thicknesses to build up the light and dark tones of a photographic print, the photogravure process deposits ink in various thicknesses to build up light and dark portions of the reproduction. A good photogravure and the photograph from which it was made are all but indistinguishable to the naked eye.” Observed under magnification though photogravures have “a fine, irregular grain pattern that real photographs lack.”









                                                              





References


Adam, Hans Christian. Edward S. Curtis. San Francisco. Barnes and Noble Inc. 2006. Print

Katzman, Mark. “The Art of The Photogravure. A Comprehensive Resource Dedicated to The Photogravure. Web. 27 Feb. 2013.


Reilly, James M. Care and Identification of 19th-Century Photographic Prints. Rochester. Eastman Kodak Co. 1986. Print.

Rosenblum, Naomi. A World History of Photography. New York. Abbeville Press. 1997. Print

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Access Points in Catalog Descriptions



One of the most important things I took from the lecture was the importance of access points so users can actually find a useful collection. I looked at records on two different OPACs to compare how successful each was in terms of providing access points to users. The first institution I looked at was UConn, and the other was the Library of Congress.

Collection-level record in the UConn library catalog:
 I thought that this record was a good example of a record that lacks necessary access points. The picture above is the full record available in the OPAC. There is very little information in this record about what sort of materials are contained in the collection. What sort of awards? What are the subjects of the photographs? Are they black and white, or color? Which publications? Listing a few of the major awards and publications by Polly Fitz would provide a few much-needed access points to this collection. As of right now, an interested researcher might not find this collection because it is so vague. The subject headings are also very vague and not that helpful.


Collection-level record in the Library of Congress catalog:
This record is too long to work as a screen shot, but if you follow the link, you will find a record that has much better access points and more thorough notes (both in terms of content and context). They also have a separate section of headings based on format, which is not done in the UConn catalog. This record is much more likely to be found by an interested researcher.

Midterm: Stereoscopic Photography


From the Greek “stereo” (“solid”) and opsis (“power of sight”) stereopsis is perceiving depth, relief, or three-dimensions (stereopsis, n., 2012). This ability is most commonly due to binocular vision, where the spacing of two eyes creates separate images of a scene from slightly different angles, which are then combined into one vision with three-dimensional quality in the brain.

The application of three-dimensional vision to two-dimensional images, by using a viewing implement, or a stereoscope, was first described by English physicist Charles Wheatstone in 1838. He created his stereoscope with prisms and mirrors, and it was originally used for viewing drawings.
Wheatstone stereoscope. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereoscope

Scottish physicist David Brewster improved the stereoscope in 1849, inventing the “refracting” or “Lenticular” stereoscope, which was reduced in size and used lenses instead of mirrors. He also invented the double camera for taking stereoscopic views, which were afterwards mostly produced with such double-lensed cameras.

These photographs were produced as stereographs, with two images side by side. Stereographs are a photographic format, not process, and were produced using multiple technical processes over time, including the daguerreotype, ambrotype, wet plate glass positive, mounted salted paper print, albumen prints, and gelatin print processes (Ritzenthaler & Vogt-O’Connor, 2006, p. 41). The majority of stereographs, also called stereo views, were mounted on cards.
Folson, A. H. (c.1850-1929). Trinity Church, Boston. Retrieved from http://www.flickr.com/photos/boston_public_library/2351548106/in/set-72157604192771132
 Daguerreotype stereographs were first publically exhibited in 1851 at the London International Exhibition, and were received enthusiastically by Queen Victoria and others (history of photography, 2013). Their popularity grew even more with the simple hand-held version of the stereoscope developed by Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1861. Holmes’ invention, which was easy to manufacture, combined with his excited promotion of stereoscopes and stereographs in The Atlantic, helped to boost the already popular form in the United States.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Holmes_stereoscope.jpg/244px-Holmes_stereoscope.jpg
Holmes stereoscope. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereoscope
Stereographs were extremely popular from 1850 through the 1920s and 1930s  (the rise of newsreels), and during this period millions of stereographs were produced. Photographers were sent out to photograph the world, and manufacturing the views was a big business. One of the first firms to produce stereographs was that of the Langenheim brothers, and later the leading publishers were Underwood & Underwood and the Keystone Company. Views could be bought individually, or more often, in large topical groups.

Stereoscopes became a popular instrument for home entertainment and education (much like radio, and then TV) and had an important impact on public knowledge and taste. Holmes was correct in his statement regarding the stereograph that, “Men will hunt all curious, beautiful, grand objects,” as the market for stereographs was expansive, and diverse (1859). Images captured local history, grand landscapes, foreign scenes, important people, architecture, war, disasters, and later on, staged scenes of humor and the home. Curiosity about the world was a huge force in stereographic popularity, and travel images as souvenirs, and of places one might never see, were very popular. 
Norman Rockwell painting of a boy viewing Egypt through his stereoscope. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rockwellboywithstereoscope.png
The expansion of the business of stereographs and their broad popularity not only impacted those directly involved, but also had an indirect impact on other branches of photography and visual theory at the time. Holmes not only wrote of the curious and beautiful objects available in stereographs, but also noted that “form is [now] cheap and transportable” (1859). Whether intentional or not, this idea was felt by those who saw in the stereograph (especially by the end of the century when stereographic photography had become quite uniform,) the cheapening of photography into popular commercialism. While these images would inform the conventions of publicity and advertisement photography in the future, they also pushed some photographers into “High Art” in response to “stereoscopic trash” (Jeffrey, 1981, p. 38).

Despite these other opinions, and the branching out of new forms in reaction to stereographs, it should be clear that stereographs hold great importance for cultural heritage institutions who might seek to collect, preserve, and offer access to these images. The broad use of stereographs in everyday residential life during these decades, along with the diversity of tastes and communities served by different stereograph subjects, has a strong impact on their usefulness for researchers in a number of fields. Their cultural currency is obvious in terms of looking at mass media, middleclass households, education, and the images themselves are rich in visual and contextual information, covering topographic views, local history, events, industries and trade, costume, urban and country life, humor, and portraits. They are also important for researching the history of photography itself, having been produced by multiple processes (stereoscopic photography, 2013). Preservation of stereographs is accordingly diverse, depending on the process by which they were made.

Stereographs and stereoscopes form an early node in the history and technology of three-dimensional viewing. Anyone who played with a slide-viewer growing up, crossed their eyes at a "Magic Eye, or enjoyed 3D at the movies has taken part in this history.

References

history of photography. (2013). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from   http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/457919/photography

Holmes, O. W. (1859, June). The stereoscope and the stereograph. The Atlantic, 6. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1859/06/the-stereoscope-            and-the-stereograph/303361/

Jeffrey, I. (1981). Photography: A concise history. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ritzenthaler, M. L. & Vogt-O’Connor, D. (2006). Photographs: Archival care and management. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.  


Stereoscopic photography. (2013). The New York Public Library. Retrieved from http://stereo.nypl.org/about/stereoscopy

Wheatstone, C. (1838). Contributions to the physiology of vision: Part the first. On some remarkable, and hitherto unobserved, phenomena of binocular vision. Philosophical Transactions, 128, 371-394. Retrieved from http://www.stereoscopy.com/library/wheatstone-paper1838.html

Additional Resources

The Getty Museum has produced a nice simulation of stereo viewing.




The Center for Civil War Photography, 3-D Anaglyph Photography Exhibit:
http://www.civilwarphotography.org/3-d-anaglyph-photographs-exhibit 

Collection Records



1) http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/cushman/overview/collOverview.jsp
Charles W. Cushman Photograph Collection: Collection Description
This description is too long for a screenshot, but I think this is a good example of a collection level description. Given the four series it is not too long, it covers the dates and extent of the materials, and genre and form. It also covers provenance, processing, original storage, preservation and new storage. Given all of the text, however the lack of detail regarding subjects, names, and themes was surprising. The link to the B&W photographs takes you to a page that offers just these types of things, so maybe they just figured people would explore the links.
Some more detail could be added to the collection description without adding too much length, with a good impact on description and the number of search terms for discovery and access. They have already decided to have a description that is long, they might as well include some of these details.
Chicago Historical Society Research Center: State Street autumn festival photograph collection [graphic]
This is a very different type of description from the one for Cushman, being in a catalog with many other collections and not at its own website/portal. But I also think this is a good example of a collection description. The title is detailed, it gives the dates, extent, form, controlled subjects (thematic and geographic), and the summary describes the event with details and also names the notable scenes for aid in discovery. I think a researcher would be able to see this description and generally know if this small collection was appealing or not.